Go **** yourself THQ

TBH I am stating my own opinion but can you please site any legal precident where there has been a sucsessful conviction where someone has access content on the disc for "dlc"?

I can't imagine there will be any legal precedent since it wouldn't be worth their time going after someone for doing it, nevermind the fact that it'd be incredibly hard to track in the first place. I'd imagine if they were going to put any effort into tracking people distributing the game or its content it'd be the ones pirating the full title. However that doesn't mean it's legal, on the contrary I'd imagine it would come under the heading of attempting to circumvent DRM which is illegal in many jurisdictions.

Also, can you exlpain as to what you do own / pay for when buynig a single player only game then? If you dont own a game you pay for i.e the content on the disc are we simply renting the game? If thats also true who does actually own the game and its assosiated content?

This was discussed earlier and like most others, I find it hard to know with any great certainty what the real legal position on usage is. I know what the companies claim you own but as was pointed out, much of detail in the typical EULA wouldn't stand up in court. Generally speaking though, I imagine you own the physical disc and a right to play the game as it is presented. As for the actual content on the disc though? Between copyrights, licenses and patents there's not a chance you own it.

BTW, chill out on the tone mate. It doesnt serve your point well , honestly it just makes you seem a bit arrogant.

My apologies if I came across as harsh but as I said, it was the third time you'd stated it and had done so in a rather factual manner. When I queried you earlier in the thread you also never replied and just repeated it. I was going for more concise than rude to be honest. The latter paragraph though is just blatantly wrong so I assumed it had something to do with you (perhaps) misunderstanding the ownership issue.

"If you own a CD you don't own the right to copy that CD in lots of places," says James Binns, head of Edge International and PC gaming at Future Publishing."You own the physical form of the disk but not the content on it. It's the same with a video console."You own the plastic and the metal but the software that runs on it is different from the device you own and Sony can claim some control over that."

Article here. Now, to bed with it all. To summarize you probably don't own anything in your room, technically.

I woud disagree with you here, when you buy a disk you are buying teh content on that disk... locked or unlocked. Not supplying the end user with a key to unlock the content is simply a countermeasure not a legal restriction. Its the software equivilent of using anti tampering screws to close a devices case. They are not legal safeguards but a deterent to stop one acessnig areas of a purchased product.

You seem to think the unreal engine creator is based in the game itself? The unreal engine code on a game disc is not the same code used by developers to build games. That is only licenced to devs and does not go on each and ever disk, if you were to add the same program that devs use to build games to each disc the size would be huge.

Really so where did you read that in my post, did i mention the Unreal dev kit anywhere. I was responding to your statement that the developers do not own everything on the disc and used the Unreal game engine as an example of how that's obvious.

In Sonys case where geohotz was threatend with legal action you'll find that was for distro of the jailbreak and use of that device on PSN ... not modding the console itself.

It was for more than one thing if you read all the claims against him.

I said it was legal in Spain as an example and illegal in the UK, it is not universally legal/illegal throughout the whole world. But it is in illegal in most of the EU where Directive 2001/29/EC was added to local laws.

I think your slightly confused here, the example you state is in refrence to cars being limited by speed limits. This is not limiting what you do TO your property but how you USE your property. As I said, modding a console or game disk is not illegal, trying to use that disc or console on a service is.

Where are you reading this in my post i made no reference to speed, while most laws are in relation to what is road legal speed is not the be all and end all.

If you want an example, Radar detectors/scramblers installed or used in a car are illegal to even posses.

You can install a 4.5ltr engine in a astra if you like. Opel will not persue you for alternig their product, you can drive it about all you want BUT you are only beaking the law if you break the speed limit.

Depends who installed it and the specifics but the NCT could fail it, as the emission levels are based on the year/model of the vehicle regardless of the size of the engine.

if they block used games it would be a sad dat for all. pretty much every game retailer out there will go bust and its going to remove the need for competitive pricing. if you think games are expensive now just wait till you see what this could do 100 euro games sound stupid but it will happen look at the prices of games in australia and you see were getting off relatively lightly.

So in a scenario where some people may not be being able to buy as many games as they might currently do, the response will be an increase in piracy rather than, say, simply not buying as many games?

When the hell did video games cross from luxury entertainment item into must have necessity?I must have missed that....

Never suggested they were must have necessities but hype, good reviews, friends having same games, word of mouth and so on - can lead to a high demand for games at times in a market dominated by the purchasing power of mostly kids.

If the second hand market is done in, people will be pissed off and hold little support for games companies.Games companies, especially large corporate PR spinning morons like THQ, EA, et all haven't got a clue how bad this will effect them so I hope it actually does destroy them and they learn things the hard way.

If a player is looking at buying a game or purchasing for the same or cheaper price a simplistic USB plug-in device that allows them play any number of games, probably from ISO images downloaded and stored on a cheap external HD - there won't be many that will resist the temptation.

Especially when you consider even the rental market will be destroyed also. So who in their right mind will take a 60 euro+ gamble on a game they'll possibly bin after an hour because it's crap ?Some will, a few times maybe, but after a while of being burned from blowing 60+ euro on crap worthless games they can't even sell-on afterwards, they'll just buy the easy to use modchip and download the games.

I don't think it will destroy consoles either (piracy that is) as you just need to look at Nintendo with their easily accessible and cheap piracy being absolutely rampant for years on their various consoles - they still turn a profit most of the time.

I've little love for the second hand retailers either tbh, I think some would be glad to see them out of business given the outrageous profits some of them turn on games compared to what they paid out for them to the customer.

Anyway, I think they'll push ahead with this either way, the consoles will be released and a cheap easy to use modchip will also be released within a month or so.

TBH I think we'd see a scenario develop where people would buy two consoles, one untouched for playing online games over Sony and Microsofts respective services and another console thats chipped for playing pirate single player games offline.

Seeing as the good online MP games are really worth the cash I wouldnt mind holding on to them and get the second console chipped, it would pay back itself over time of buying ****ty 10 hr single player only games at a fiver each pirated rather than full price. I know its what Id do. In that scenario the devs still wouldnt get a return on this, about the only people to profit would be MS and Sony.

I think a lot of it boils down to a massive difference between what devs perceive to be value and what consumers perceive as value. For me the likes of Battlefield and COD are good value based on the amount of time one would spend playing the game per year but the likes of The darkness 2 I wouldnt see as being worth a full 60 eur and wouldnt buy without trading against it. Realistically I just dont think spending 60 eur on a game that will last me a week at max just isnt worth it but clearly developers think that it is.

Steam isn't a great example to use as it's PC/MAC based and everyone really knows there never was a second hand market for PC games (for years now).

PC got fecked over long ago with the stuff they're only now suggesting to be brought in for consoles.

Steam, MMO's and Indie developers brought PC gaming back to a manageable level. Otherwise it would have been destroyed.

Well, OK I guess you are right in saying that there is no longer a real market for second hand PC games - but I still think it illustrates that if a developer is presented with a workable option to limit the second hand market for their games then they are likely to choose it.

Steam is great though (if I do say so myself! ), as it actually gives the player extra features rather than just solely placing restrictions on the end user.

Games companies, especially large corporate PR spinning morons like THQ, EA, et all haven't got a clue how bad this will effect them so I hope it actually does destroy them and they learn things the hard way.

And this would lead to what for gamers? A smaller number of quality games.

If a player is looking at buying a game or purchasing for the same or cheaper price a simplistic USB plug-in device that allows them play any number of games, probably from ISO images downloaded and stored on a cheap external HD - there won't be many that will resist the temptation.

No company should be held to ransom by consumers with the moral compass of a bin bag.

Especially when you consider even the rental market will be destroyed also. So who in their right mind will take a 60 euro+ gamble on a game they'll possibly bin after an hour because it's crap ?Some will, a few times maybe, but after a while of being burned from blowing 60+ euro on crap worthless games they can't even sell-on afterwards, they'll just buy the easy to use modchip and download the games.

Play the demo. Read the reviews. Listen to what others have to say. Shop around. All of these will avoid you spending €60 on a game you'll bin so quickly.

I don't think it will destroy consoles either (piracy that is) as you just need to look at Nintendo with their easily accessible and cheap piracy being absolutely rampant for years on their various consoles - they still turn a profit most of the time.

It didn't affect Nintendo, it affected nearly every third party publisher/developer who released a title on the DS and, to a lesser extent, the Wii.

TBH I think we'd see a scenario develop where people would buy two consoles, one untouched for playing online games over Sony and Microsofts respective services and another console thats chipped for playing pirate single player games offline.

As above, where do you think this will leave gamers? It boggles my mind how people can on one hand complain about the introduction of unnecessary multiplayer modes into games and single player campaigns being too short when they adopt that kind of attitude.

Seeing as the good online MP games are really worth the cash I wouldnt mind holding on to them and get the second console chipped, it would pay back itself over time of buying ****ty 10 hr single player only games at a fiver each pirated rather than full price. I know its what Id do. In that scenario the devs still wouldnt get a return on this, about the only people to profit would be MS and Sony.

Congratulations on becoming a thief and as big a detriment to the industry as the bull**** some of the companies that you're decrying pull.

I think a lot of it boils down to a massive difference between what devs perceive to be value and what consumers perceive as value. For me the likes of Battlefield and COD are good value based on the amount of time one would spend playing the game per year but the likes of The darkness 2 I wouldnt see as being worth a full 60 eur and wouldnt buy without trading against it. Realistically I just dont think spending 60 eur on a game that will last me a week at max just isnt worth it but clearly developers think that it is.

There are many many gamers who still consider single player games with campaigns that weigh in at around ten hours to be great value for money. They would much prefer a well balanced, exciting and perfectly paced single player campaign to the kind of tacked on multiplayer bull**** that's cropping up in most games these days. You think anyone will give a **** about Modern Warfare 3 in a couple of years? Not a chance. On the other hand, in years to come people will still look back on the likes of Uncharted 2, Batman Arkham Asylum, Portal, ICO and Shadow Of The Colossus as utterly fantastic games.